The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1887-06-02
THE COUNCIL OF ARCHBISHOPS.
Its Approaching Assembly in Baltimore tt
Take Action the Labor Problem.

notice that several journals have taken oc-
ment about Cardinal Gibbons's sudden and I'M
expected return in order to hold a council of the
archbishops for the consideration of the ques-
ton of labor organizations. A week later. after
flood of talk and kilograms it became
tablished fact that was right, and the Cardinal.
tits now admitted, will return during June instead
OF the last of August, as had been planned. There
two details in that article which
have not been verified; for instance, the state
ment that he would take Havre steamer for
New York-which was actually his first inten-
ton, though he altered it-whereas he has paid
flying visit to Cardinal Manning at Kensing-
ton, and Archbishop Walsh at Dublin. But
these details of his movements are apt to be
changed according to passing circums stances,
while the main fact that he is hurrying back to
America suddenly and unexpectedly in order to
hold the council indicated cannot for q nome Mt
be questioned
1t is not for the purpose OF convincing skep-
teal rivals or anybody else but to give the Suns
readers command of the facts of the situation,
that have been wading through the bulky
''Acta ct Decreta" of the late Plenary Council,
and sitting out the passages which bear upon the
subject in hand. Most readers and alleged in,
vestgators, when they refer to the ''decrees" of
the late council, quote merely from the pastoral
letter issued by it. It is in English, and thus a
good deal easier to read than the Latin text of
the ecclesiastical language of the middle ages,
and which is often puzzling to the most
familiar student of the ancient classics
Its very simplicity and quaintness
are often stumbling blocks to the reader
However. here only can we find the real legisla-
ton of the Council The pastoral letter, while
often containing literal traEslations from the
Decreta, deals only with the general discussion
of subjects, and contains merely admontions to
the faithful for it is to them that it is addressed
AS L have written before, the late Council de-
creed that no priest bishop should condemn a
society of any kind until the archbishops of the
country, sitting in council, should have passed
upon ID. Now turn to the pastoral letter and
see what it has to say:
But while the church is THUS careful to guard her
children against whatever IS contrary to Christian
duty, she is less careful that injustice should be
done to any association, however Internationally.
While, therefore. the church. before prohibiting any
society. will take every precauton to ascertain its
true nature positively forbid any pastor other
ecclesastc to sentence any association, to
impose ecclesiastical penalties disabilities its
members without the previous explicit authorization
of the rightful authorities.
This passage, it will be perceived. contains
only general outlines; it has particular mean
ing information. There is not a word in it
about the commission of archbishops. Bishop is
skiilfully disguised under "other eccesiastic;" it
would not be well to spread before the people
the fact that a severe check had been put upon
the hitherto autocratic power OF the
bishops. Now let us turn to the CORE
observe the difference. The indefinite "other
ecclesiastic" disappears and ordinary is substi-
tuted-that is, the ruler of a bishopric. whether
he be permanent incumbent temporary
administrator. The gist of the Latin text is
that hitherto a confusion of disciplines had pre-
walled, whereby some society had been con-
QemnoO III one decree ana tolerated In Otn6r6
to tho great scandal of the faithful and to the
detriment of the ecclesiastical authorities; and
the council consequently orders that no society
shall be condemned by name until the ordinary
shall have received power to do so, which he can
do, if he shows proper cause, by submitting the
case to the commission which had been created
for judging of such matters according to the
cauons, and which constituted of all the
archbishops of these provinces. If they could
not agree about the condemnation of the in
dicted society, the matter was to be referred to
~ Ha1xr and f1t1n 1tx,0
would be secured.
This protection OF the people from arbitrary
action on the part of single bishops was not
adopted without sharp struggle. The great
majority of American bishops, with Cardinal
Gibbons at their head, really men of liberal
thought, and inclined to be tolerant pos
of the many priests in tho Council, whose
thority though minor as to individuals. was
large when the number is considered Thus.
each arch bishop had two theologlans, and each
bishop one. and, besides there were a quantity
of officers, nearly equal to the whole catalogue
of bishops 1t was the priests who really framed
cathedral the priests met at st. Mary's Semi
nary Paca street The two bodies were
very much like the Senate and the House of
Representatives at Washington. Just the
last named originates most of the legislation
and sends it to the Senate for approval
amendment. so the priests at St Mary's Semi
nary drafted nine -tenths of the DEGREES and
forwarded them to the bishops at the cathedral
for their discussion, amendment or rejection.
Quiet a number of the drafts thus sent up
bitterly fought over and the one we
considering did not escape this fate. There are
half dozen bishops in this country-not the
most intellectual, Cardinal Gibbons.
Bishops keane, Spalding Ireland, Archbishop
Williams, and many others, all liberals but
keen, active men-like Bishop Gilmour. of Cleve-
land, and the bishop of Fort Wayne who have
succeeded in making great noise. who have
tried to force their views on the church at large
who have made the public think their numerous
utterances are the infallible pronouncements of
the church, and who are bitterly opposed to any
movement which bears the slightest resemblance
to an effort for the triumph of the democratic
masses. But their fight in the Council was vain.
They were speedily and overwhelmingly voted
down. and the measure protective of the free
action OF the laity was swiftly passed.
Before reaching the passage | have summa
rized, the decree ''De Solicitations" Division L,
DE Solicitations Inhonests," had been dealing.
as usual, with the general aspects of the sub
lect. 1t quotes extensively from the encycIical
humanum genus of Leo Kill the constitutions
of the Holy See, the quo graviora of Leo XII,
and the decree with similar title to this one of
the Second Plenary Council in all. seven large
pages. 1t particularly dwells upon the passage
in its predecessors decree relating to combna-
tions Of workingmen to defraud their employers
of contracted work by violence other unlaw
full means. The quoted passage runs as fol
lows:
Care must be taken lest workingrnen's societies,
der the pretext of mutual assistance and protection
should commit any of the evils of condemned socie
ties: and the should be induced by the
articles of designing men to break the laws OF Justice
by withholding labor to which they are rlghtluiY
bound by otherwise unlawfuly violating the rights
of their employers
l have now drawn out the action of the Coun
ell. Especially does the last-quoted passage
bear upon the situation to-day. The Council
takes great to emphasize the fact that all
movements for the betterment of workingmen
have and have always had, the full sanction
and the hearty commentator of the church.
When such pretended movements 60 beyond the
bounds of law. then they cannot be described as
for the betterment of the toilers. but rather for
their degradation. Even well-intentioned move
ments, with honest men in the leadership, are
often led to take steps which unwise and
often positively criminal just here comes in